Scan this post

Kevin Kelly’s NY Times Magazine article, Scan This Book, blew my mind. I read it straight through on Sunday and have re-read selected snippets a few times trying to wrap my mind around the implications. Here are a few selections that really jumped out at me (with my comments if I rally the brain cells to assist me.)

Kelly writes,

The link and the tag may be two of the most important inventions of the last 50 years. They get their initial wave of power when we first code them into bits of text, but their real transformative energies fire up as ordinary users click on them in the course of everyday Web surfing, unaware that each humdrum click “votes” on a link, elevating its rank of relevance. You may think you are just browsing, casually inspecting this paragraph or that page, but in fact you are anonymously marking up the Web with bread crumbs of attention. These bits of interest are gathered and analyzed by search engines in order to strengthen the relationship between the end points of every link and the connections suggested by each tag. This is a type of intelligence common on the Web, but previously foreign to the world of books.

Mind blow the first: Simply by clicking on a link we are affecting the order the of the web. What seems to be a “read” action, turns out to be more of a “read/write” action. The more we click on something, the more likely it becomes that someone else will find it and click on it.

Kelly writes,

Once digitized, books can be unraveled into single pages or be reduced further, into snippets of a page. These snippets will be remixed into reordered books and virtual bookshelves. Just as the music audience now juggles and reorders songs into new albums (or “playlists,” as they are called in iTunes), the universal library will encourage the creation of virtual “bookshelves” — a collection of texts, some as short as a paragraph, others as long as entire books, that form a library shelf’s worth of specialized information. And as with music playlists, once created, these “bookshelves” will be published and swapped in the public commons. Once snippets, articles and pages of books become ubiquitous, shuffle-able and transferable, users will earn prestige and perhaps income for curating an excellent collection.

Mind blow the second: Individual enthusiasts writing, selecting, “curating”, mashing, may soon be on an equal footing with the “experts.” I can already see this happening with wikis and blogs. The truth is, I now get almost zero useful information from our professional literature (It takes me about 10 minutes to read American Libraries and/or LJ.) But I get an immense amount of useful and stimulating information –information that is helping me do my job better– from a number of library and marketing blogs that I read regularly with the the help of RSS. (So how long before we hear, “Dude, have you heard my mashup of Federalist #51 and the new Neil Young album? Publius rocks!!)

And there’s more. A lot more.

The sorry state of our copyright law, and the black hole of out-of-print information it has created (sucking, sucking, sucking information away from the public domain.)

The fact that a large % of out-of-print info can’t be put back into print because, well, because no one even knows who owns the copyrights.

The possibility that Google can bring much of this “lost” information back into play by scanning and indexing it, thereby shifting the onus to copyright holders to exert claims (if they have them.)

The filtering power of hyperlinks and tags to bring items that exist out on the long tail to peoples’ attention. (think: If you like Ryan Adams, you may like the Jayhawks, and if you like the Jayhawks you may like, Uncle Tupelo, and if like Uncle Tupelo, you may like Calexico, and if you like Calexico you may like Giant Sand, and if you like Giant Sand, you may like their album Glum (and that’s about as long tail as it gets.)

I’ll be re-reading this piece, and reading other blogger’s thoughts on it, trying to flesh out and extrapolate what it all means for libraries. It occurs to me that the Overdrive audiobooks platform already allows us to add our own pdf and audio content to the collection. Will librarians soon be performing more local collection development of digital formats?

The possibilities (and challenges) of adding exponentially more community created content (like Atlantic City’s teen poetry slam, or flickr photo sets, or autobiographies) as permanent additions to the collection is intriguing!

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

7 Comments

1.Nancy Dowd | May 16, 2006 at 6:47 am

Pete talk about being on the same wave length! Great review, glad to see someone else’s mind was blown away!!! After reading that article on Sunday it got me thinking and exploring the implications of it for marketing. One thing led to another and before long I was coming across how the new trend is to create tagging contests. Check out my blog (http://themwordblog.blogspot.com) to see how how libraries can use this idea. –Nancy

2.David | May 16, 2006 at 7:58 am

Great post! The NYT article is going to be another classic like the Wired long tail article. Nice long tail example too, although if you followed it you might not like Ryan Adams quite as much anymore!

3.K.G. Schneider | May 16, 2006 at 11:00 am

Pete, this is a delightful summary. I agree with David’s comment that the NYT article will be a classic. Be sure to read LJ’s interview with Ben Vershbow of if:book .

4.Janie L. Hermann | May 18, 2006 at 8:18 am

I was thinking about your post on the way to work this morning, especially the comment that you now get your most useful professional development information from blogs and wikis.

Yesterday I was talking to a reporter about a Tech Talk that I will be giving in a few weeks. The talk will include a variety of 2.0 sites — it is called “Fantastic Freebies for Everyone”. We talked for well over an hour because every time I mentioned something like Pandora or Library Thing I then needed to explain a little bit about the concept of Web 2.0 and how it all fits together with the freebies I will be deomonstrating.

The reporter was intrigued and asked me how I could know so much about all this new “stuff”. My reply was that I read a few dozen blogs daily via my aggregator(which of course led to a discussion of what is an aggregator).

Long story short, it really hit home to me yesterday that the vast amount of new knowledge that I have gained over the last year has come from the biblioblogosphere. I still scan the professional literature and read an occasional article, but my real learning is online.

5.Chris | May 24, 2006 at 7:23 pm

I just read a brief commentary that gives a different perspective on this – I think the writer makes a good point that new technologies might make the book less relevant, but still and all, the book will endure. Check it out:“Why Books Resist the Rise of Novel Technologies”:http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,20411-2193549,00.html, from the Times Online.

6.Chris | May 24, 2006 at 7:23 pm

I just read a brief commentary that gives a different perspective on this – I think the writer makes a good point that new technologies might make the book less relevant, but still and all, the book will endure. Check it out:“Why Books Resist the Rise of Novel Technologies”:http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,20411-2193549,00.html, from the Times Online.

A Note on the history of posts

Please note that all Library Garden posts dated earlier than September 13,2009 originally appeared on our Blogger site. These posts have been imported to this site as a convenience when searching the entire site for content.

If you are interested in seeing the original post, with formatting and comments in tact, please bring up the original post at our old Blogger site.